Eastwood vs Jarrahmond
Property investment comparison - Eastwood, VIC 3875 vs Jarrahmond, VIC 3888
Head-to-head across core investment metrics: Eastwood wins 1, Jarrahmond wins 1. The better choice depends on whether you're optimising for cash flow, growth, affordability, or liquidity, the table below highlights the winner on each metric.
| Metric | Eastwood | Jarrahmond |
|---|---|---|
| Median house price | $635K | $635K |
| Median unit price | $440K | - |
| Gross rental yield (houses) | 4.20% | 3.75% |
| Gross rental yield (units) | 4.39% | - |
| 1-year house growth | +4.3% | - |
| 3-year house growth | +3.5% | - |
| Vacancy rate | 2.2% | 0.8% |
| Population | 2,855 | 117 |
Eastwood vs Jarrahmond: what the numbers say
Houses cost about the same in both suburbs: the median house price is $635K in Eastwood and $635K in Jarrahmond.
On cash flow, Eastwood leads: houses there return a gross rental yield of 4.20%, compared with 3.75% in Jarrahmond, a gap of 0.45 percentage points.
Rental vacancy is 0.8% in Jarrahmond and 2.2% in Eastwood, so landlords in Jarrahmond face less competition for tenants. Anything under 2% is generally read as a tight market where tenants compete for homes.
Eastwood is the bigger suburb, with a population of 2,855 against 117, roughly 24 times the size of Jarrahmond; a larger suburb usually means a deeper pool of buyers and tenants.
In short: Eastwood for rental income, Jarrahmond for the tighter rental market. Which matters more depends on whether the investor is buying for cash flow, capital growth or affordability.
Keep exploring
- National investment guide - top suburbs across every metric
- Take the suburb finder quiz - 5 questions to match your goals
- How our investment score works
- Property investment glossary - every term defined
Compare any 2-4 Australian suburbs
Build your own multi-suburb comparison with the full interactive tool.
Open interactive comparison